"FFE was an attempt to convert the game's core competitions into an investable, tradeable and undervalued financial asset for private capital." That's not a protest banner. That's the conclusion of a formal report by FIFPRO Europe, produced with Player IQ and Football Benchmark — and it's directed squarely at FIFA's front door.
The trigger is FIFA President Gianni Infantino's Forward Enterprise (FFE) initiative, which he unveiled earlier this year and then quietly withdrew when opposition mounted. The proposal, had it survived, would have funnelled football's flagship competitions toward private investment — developed, apparently, without meaningful consultation with players, clubs, or leagues. FIFPRO Europe's argument is simple: the fact it got as far as it did proves something is seriously broken.
The governance gap FIFA doesn't want to talk about
FIFPRO Europe isn't just criticising a dead proposal. They're pointing at the structure that allowed it to breathe in the first place. The union is calling for an independent review of FIFA Council executive decision-making — specifically to prevent major changes being pushed through by a single office acting unilaterally. That's a direct shot at how Infantino operates.
FIFA's own response to wider governance criticism, filed in court documents related to UEFA legal challenges, has been to frame European resistance as protectionism — an attempt to preserve the continent's dominance. It's a convenient deflection. FIFPRO Europe's report doesn't read like a power grab. It reads like an audit.
The data they've published is worth sitting with. European clubs supplied 856 players to the expanded 2026 World Cup, with those players valued at roughly €16.9 billion — 94% of the tournament's total player value. Every single individual award winner across the last five World Cups was employed by a European club. And yet the share of World Cup revenue distributed as prize money to participating nations has dropped from 10.5% in 2006 to just 7.7% in 2026, even as tournament revenues have grown substantially.
Where the money actually goes
That declining prize money share matters beyond the principle of it. Participating federations — particularly smaller ones — rely on World Cup prize distributions as FIFA's only performance-based revenue stream. If that share keeps shrinking while overall revenue climbs, the solidarity argument FIFA uses to defend its centralised control becomes harder to sustain.
FIFPRO Europe says it supports increased development funding for smaller federations. What it won't accept is FIFA designing the mechanism alone and presenting it as fait accompli. "Any future proposal to grow solidarity funding should be built together, through trusted governance, not advanced unilaterally," the union said.
The formal ask: players, clubs, and leagues included alongside national associations in football governance structures. That's a seismic shift from how FIFA has operated for decades — and Infantino's FIFA has shown little appetite for sharing the room.
Reuters contacted FIFA for comment. At time of writing, none had been provided.
